2008 Republican Convention Thread

[quote name='StealthNinjaScyther']"The major principles found in the constitution - separation of powers, checks and balances, limited government, separation of church and state, etc - are found nowhere in the bible, or in Christian theology for that matter." -Ed Brayton

Here's the source for that:
http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2003/12/was_american_founded_on_christ.php

While this country is most certainly a Christian nation in the sense that the majority of Americans are Christian, it doesn't really extend past that. If you want to make the claim that America was founded upon the Christian faith, go ahead, show us the documents. Here's a hint: they don't exist.

Yeah, I got your back Crotch. I might not be the best with words, but I know where to find the facts.[/quote]
[quote name='James Madison']What influence, in fact, have ecclesiastical establishments had on society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the civil authority; in many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny; in no instance have they been the guardians of the liberties of the people. [/quote]Hell, many religious leaders of the day derided the constitution (Constitution?) as being atheistic.

EDIT: Not trying to start a bullshit quote war here or anything, just saying.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='StealthNinjaScyther']"The major principles found in the constitution - separation of powers, checks and balances, limited government, separation of church and state, etc - are found nowhere in the bible, or in Christian theology for that matter." -Ed Brayton

Here's the source for that:
http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2003/12/was_american_founded_on_christ.php

While this country is most certainly a Christian nation in the sense that the majority of Americans are Christian, it doesn't really extend past that. If you want to make the claim that America was founded upon the Christian faith, go ahead, show us the documents. Here's a hint: they don't exist.

Yeah, I got your back Crotch. I might not be the best with words, but I know where to find the facts.[/QUOTE]How lame are you? I never said Christianity is the root of our founding documents. I said those who founded this country had faith in a creator. I never mentioned Christianity as part of that or even religion for that matter. Having faith in something bigger than oneself and allowing that faith to guide you is completely different than any proper, organized religion.

People are allowed to let their faith guide their actions. If you are an elected official, that means that your decisions that are guided by your faith help make policy. It doesn't matter what religion she belongs to, Pentecostal, Baptist, LDS, Catholic, Muslim, Zoarastrianism, Buddhism, etc. Just because you belong to those groups doesn't mean your actions are being manipulated by some secret organizing body. But faith does necessarily guide you.

And laws don't necessarily need secular reasoning. You need secular reasoning. Like you said, the majority of America is Christian. So, the majority of America is willing to accept laws based upon Christian ideals. They don't need additonal reasoning when they already agree. And the majority of Muslims and Jews are willing to accept those same things simply because the "Big 3" have much more in common than they have different from one another. Now, the Supreme Court, in reviewing a law, needs more than a, "well it sounds like a good law." But the voters and elected officials can pass any law they damn well please because the majority of Americans (especially any one smaller community) really feel the same way about most things.

But in the end, the founding documents do talk about faith in a Creator. That is all I ever claimed. And I did so because I do worry about offending the gentle effeminate opinions such as yours that get trodden under foot so easily. So, if you want to play your little game, I can throw quotes at you too...

John Adams and John Hancock:
We Recognize No Sovereign but God, and no King but Jesus! [April 18, 1775]

John Adams:
The general principles upon which the Fathers achieved independence were the general principals of Christianity… I will avow that I believed and now believe that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God.
• “[July 4th] ought to be commemorated as the day of deliverance by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty.”
–John Adams in a letter written to Abigail on the day the Declaration was approved by Congress

"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." --October 11, 1798

"I have examined all religions, as well as my narrow sphere, my straightened means, and my busy life, would allow; and the result is that the Bible is the best Book in the world. It contains more philosophy than all the libraries I have seen." December 25, 1813 letter to Thomas Jefferson

"Without Religion this World would be Something not fit to be mentioned in polite Company, I mean Hell." [John Adams to Thomas Jefferson, April 19, 1817] |
.......click here to see this quote in its context and to see John Adams' quotes taken OUT of context!
Samuel Adams: | Portrait of Sam Adams | Powerpoint presentation on John, John Quincy, and Sam Adams
He who made all men hath made the truths necessary to human happiness obvious to all… Our forefathers opened the Bible to all.” [ "American Independence," August 1, 1776. Speech delivered at the State House in Philadelphia]
ME: You mean the truths that are self evident? The truths talked about in the Declaration? Those truths were made obvious to all (including the forefathers) by God? That means Jesus, right? You have read the many quotes here that say Jesus is God, right? Deism my...

Let divines and philosophers, statesmen and patriots, unite their endeavors to renovate the age by impressing the minds of men with the importance of educating their little boys and girls, inculcating in the minds of youth the fear and love of the Deity… and leading them in the study and practice of the exalted virtues of the Christian system.” [October 4, 1790]

John Quincy Adams:
• “Why is it that, next to the birthday of the Savior of the world, your most joyous and most venerated festival returns on this day [the Fourth of July]?" “Is it not that, in the chain of human events, the birthday of the nation is indissolubly linked with the birthday of the Savior? That it forms a leading event in the progress of the Gospel dispensation? Is it not that the Declaration of Independence first organized the social compact on the foundation of the Redeemer's mission upon earth? That it laid the cornerstone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity"?
--1837, at the age of 69, when he delivered a Fourth of July speech at Newburyport, Massachusetts.

“The Law given from Sinai [The Ten Commandments] was a civil and municipal as well as a moral and religious code.”
John Quincy Adams. Letters to his son. p. 61

Elias Boudinot: | Portrait of Elias Boudinot
Be religiously careful in our choice of all public officers . . . and judge of the tree by its fruits.

Charles Carroll - signer of the Declaration of Independence | Portrait of Charles Carroll
" Without morals a republic cannot subsist any length of time; they therefore who are decrying the Christian religion, whose morality is so sublime and pure...are undermining the solid foundation of morals, the best security for the duration of free governments." [Source: To James McHenry on November 4, 1800.]

Benjamin Franklin: | Portrait of Ben Franklin
God governs in the affairs of man. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid? We have been assured in the Sacred Writings that except the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it. I firmly believe this. I also believe that, without His concurring aid, we shall succeed in this political building no better than the builders of Babel” –Constitutional Convention of 1787 | original manuscript of this speech

In the beginning of the contest with Britain, when we were sensible of danger, we had daily prayers in this room for Divine protection. Our prayers, Sir, were heard, and they were graciously answered… do we imagine we no longer need His assistance?” [Constitutional Convention, Thursday June 28, 1787]
Do I really need to continue highlighting these? I mean, if you purport that these men were not Christian and that those values did not guide them, I say that you are knowingly being a fraud.

In Benjamin Franklin's 1749 plan of education for public schools in Pennsylvania, he insisted that schools teach "the excellency of the Christian religion above all others, ancient or modern."

In 1787 when Franklin helped found Benjamin Franklin University, it was dedicated as "a nursery of religion and learning, built on Christ, the Cornerstone."

Alexander Hamilton:
Hamilton began work with the Rev. James Bayard to form the Christian Constitutional Society to help spread over the world the two things which Hamilton said made America great:
(1) Christianity
(2) a Constitution formed under Christianity.
“The Christian Constitutional Society, its object is first: The support of the Christian religion. Second: The support of the United States.”


On July 12, 1804 at his death, Hamilton said, “I have a tender reliance on the mercy of the Almighty, through the merits of the Lord Jesus Christ. I am a sinner. I look to Him for mercy; pray for me.

"For my own part, I sincerely esteem it [the Constitution] a system which without the finger of God, never could have been suggested and agreed upon by such a diversity of interests." [1787 after the Constitutional Convention]

"I have carefully examined the evidences of the Christian religion, and if I was sitting as a juror upon its authenticity I would unhesitatingly give my verdict in its favor. I can prove its truth as clearly as any proposition ever submitted to the mind of man."

John Hancock:
• “In circumstances as dark as these, it becomes us, as Men and Christians, to reflect that whilst every prudent measure should be taken to ward off the impending judgments, …at the same time all confidence must be withheld from the means we use; and reposed only on that God rules in the armies of Heaven, and without His whole blessing, the best human counsels are but foolishness… Resolved; …Thursday the 11th of May…to humble themselves before God under the heavy judgments felt and feared, to confess the sins that have deserved them, to implore the Forgiveness of all our transgressions, and a spirit of repentance and reformation …and a Blessing on the … Union of the American Colonies in Defense of their Rights [for which hitherto we desire to thank Almighty God]…That the people of Great Britain and their rulers may have their eyes opened to discern the things that shall make for the peace of the nation…for the redress of America’s many grievances, the restoration of all her invaded liberties, and their security to the latest generations.
"A Day of Fasting, Humiliation and Prayer, with a total abstinence from labor and recreation. Proclamation on April 15, 1775"

Patrick Henry:
"Orator of the Revolution."
• This is all the inheritance I can give my dear family. The religion of Christ can give them one which will make them rich indeed.”
—The Last Will and Testament of Patrick Henry

“It cannot be emphasized too clearly and too often that this nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religion, but on the gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason, peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here.” [May 1765 Speech to the House of Burgesses]

“The Bible is worth all other books which have ever been printed.”

John Jay:
“ Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.” Source: October 12, 1816. The Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, Henry P. Johnston, ed., (New York: Burt Franklin, 1970), Vol. IV, p. 393.

“Whether our religion permits Christians to vote for infidel rulers is a question which merits more consideration than it seems yet to have generally received either from the clergy or the laity. It appears to me that what the prophet said to Jehoshaphat about his attachment to Ahab ["Shouldest thou help the ungodly and love them that hate the Lord?" 2 Chronicles 19:2] affords a salutary lesson.” [The Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, 1794-1826, Henry P. Johnston, editor (New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1893), Vol. IV, p.365]

Thomas Jefferson:
“ The doctrines of Jesus are simple, and tend to all the happiness of man.”

“Of all the systems of morality, ancient or modern which have come under my observation, none appears to me so pure as that of Jesus.”

"I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus."

“God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are a gift from God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, and that His justice cannot sleep forever.” (excerpts are inscribed on the walls of the Jefferson Memorial in the nations capital) [Source: Merrill . D. Peterson, ed., Jefferson Writings, (New York: Literary Classics of the United States, Inc., 1984), Vol. IV, p. 289. From Jefferson’s Notes on the State of Virginia, Query XVIII, 1781.]

Samuel Johnston:
• “It is apprehended that Jews, Mahometans (Muslims), pagans, etc., may be elected to high offices under the government of the United States. Those who are Mahometans, or any others who are not professors of the Christian religion, can never be elected to the office of President or other high office, [unless] first the people of America lay aside the Christian religion altogether, it may happen. Should this unfortunately take place, the people will choose such men as think as they do themselves.
[Elliot’s Debates, Vol. IV, pp 198-199, Governor Samuel Johnston, July 30, 1788 at the North Carolina Ratifying Convention]

James Madison
“ We’ve staked our future on our ability to follow the Ten Commandments with all of our heart.”

“We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We’ve staked the future of all our political institutions upon our capacity…to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God.” [1778 to the General Assembly of the State of Virginia]

• I have sometimes thought there could not be a stronger testimony in favor of religion or against temporal enjoyments, even the most rational and manly, than for men who occupy the most honorable and gainful departments and [who] are rising in reputation and wealth, publicly to declare the unsatisfactoriness [of temportal enjoyments] by becoming fervent advocates in the cause of Christ; and I wish you may give in your evidence in this way.
Letter by Madison to William Bradford (September 25, 1773)
• In 1812, President Madison signed a federal bill which economically aided the Bible Society of Philadelphia in its goal of the mass distribution of the Bible.
“ An Act for the relief of the Bible Society of Philadelphia” Approved February 2, 1813 by Congress

“It is the mutual duty of all to practice Christian forbearance, love, and charity toward each other.”

• A watchful eye must be kept on ourselves lest, while we are building ideal monuments of renown and bliss here, we neglect to have our names enrolled in the Annals of Heaven. [Letter by Madison to William Bradford [urging him to make sure of his own salvation] November 9, 1772]

At the Constitutional Convention of 1787, James Madison proposed the plan to divide the central government into three branches. He discovered this model of government from the Perfect Governor, as he read Isaiah 33:22;
“For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver,
the LORD is our king;
He will save us.”
[Baron Charles Montesquieu, wrote in 1748; “Nor is there liberty if the power of judging is not separated from legislative power and from executive power. If it [the power of judging] were joined to legislative power, the power over life and liberty of the citizens would be arbitrary, for the judge would be the legislature if it were joined to the executive power, the judge could have the force of an oppressor. All would be lost if the same … body of principal men … exercised these three powers." Madison claimed Isaiah 33:22 as the source of division of power in government
See also: pp.241-242 in Teaching and Learning America’s Christian History: The Principle approach by Rosalie Slater]

James McHenry – Signer of the Constitution
Public utility pleads most forcibly for the general distribution of the Holy Scriptures. The doctrine they preach, the obligations they impose, the punishment they threaten, the rewards they promise, the stamp and image of divinity they bear, which produces a conviction of their truths, can alone secure to society, order and peace, and to our courts of justice and constitutions of government, purity, stability and usefulness. In vain, without the Bible, we increase penal laws and draw entrenchments around our institutions. Bibles are strong entrenchments. Where they abound, men cannot pursue wicked courses, and at the same time enjoy quiet conscience.

Jedediah Morse:
"To the kindly influence of Christianity we owe that degree of civil freedom, and political and social happiness which mankind now enjoys. . . . Whenever the pillars of Christianity shall be overthrown, our present republican forms of government, and all blessings which flow from them, must fall with them."

John Peter Gabriel Muhlenberg
In a sermon delivered to his Virginia congregation on Jan. 21, 1776, he preached from Ecclesiastes 3.
Arriving at verse 8, which declares that there is a time of war and a time of peace, Muhlenberg noted that this surely was not the time of peace; this was the time of war. Concluding with a prayer, and while standing in full view of the congregation, he removed his clerical robes to reveal that beneath them he was wearing the uniform of an officer in the Continental army! He marched to the back of the church; ordered the drum to beat for recruits and over three hundred men joined him, becoming the Eighth Virginia Brigade. John Peter Muhlenberg finished the Revolution as a Major-General, having been at Valley Forge and having participated in the battles of Brandywine, Germantown, Monmouth, Stonypoint, and Yorktown.

Thomas Paine:
“ It has been the error of the schools to teach astronomy, and all the other sciences, and subjects of natural philosophy, as accomplishments only; whereas they should be taught theologically, or with reference to the Being who is the author of them: for all the principles of science are of divine origin. Man cannot make, or invent, or contrive principles: he can only discover them; and he ought to look through the discovery to the Author.”
“ The evil that has resulted from the error of the schools, in teaching natural philosophy as an accomplishment only, has been that of generating in the pupils a species of atheism. Instead of looking through the works of creation to the Creator himself, they stop short, and employ the knowledge they acquire to create doubts of his existence. They labour with studied ingenuity to ascribe every thing they behold to innate properties of matter, and jump over all the rest by saying, that matter is eternal.” “The Existence of God--1810”

Benjamin Rush:
• “I lament that we waste so much time and money in punishing crimes and take so little pains to prevent them…we neglect the only means of establishing and perpetuating our republican forms of government; that is, the universal education of our youth in the principles of Christianity by means of the Bible; for this Divine Book, above all others, constitutes the soul of republicanism.” “By withholding the knowledge of [the Scriptures] from children, we deprive ourselves of the best means of awakening moral sensibility in their minds.” [Letter written (1790’s) in Defense of the Bible in all schools in America]
• “Christianity is the only true and perfect religion.”
• “If moral precepts alone could have reformed mankind, the mission of the Son of God into our world would have been unnecessary.”

"Let the children who are sent to those schools be taught to read and write and above all, let both sexes be carefully instructed in the principles and obligations of the Christian religion. This is the most essential part of education”
Letters of Benjamin Rush, "To the citizens of Philadelphia: A Plan for Free Schools", March 28, 1787

Justice Joseph Story:
“ I verily believe Christianity necessary to the support of civil society. One of the beautiful boasts of our municipal jurisprudence is that Christianity is a part of the Common Law. . . There never has been a period in which the Common Law did not recognize Christianity as lying its foundations.”
[Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States p. 593]
“ Infidels and pagans were banished from the halls of justice as unworthy of credit.” [Life and letters of Joseph Story, Vol. II 1851, pp. 8-9.]
“ At the time of the adoption of the constitution, and of the amendment to it, now under consideration [i.e., the First Amendment], the general, if not the universal sentiment in America was, that Christianity ought to receive encouragement from the state, so far as was not incompatible with the private rights of conscience, and the freedom of religious worship.”
[Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States p. 593]

Noah Webster:
“ The duties of men are summarily comprised in the Ten Commandments, consisting of two tables; one comprehending the duties which we owe immediately to God-the other, the duties we owe to our fellow men.”

“In my view, the Christian religion is the most important and one of the first things in which all children, under a free government ought to be instructed...No truth is more evident to my mind than that the Christian religion must be the basis of any government intended to secure the rights and privileges of a free people.”
[Source: 1828, in the preface to his American Dictionary of the English Language]

Let it be impressed on your mind that God commands you to choose for rulers just men who will rule in the fear of God [Exodus 18:21]. . . . If the citizens neglect their duty and place unprincipled men in office, the government will soon be corrupted . . . If our government fails to secure public prosperity and happiness, it must be because the citizens neglect the Divine commands, and elect bad men to make and administer the laws. [Noah Webster, The History of the United States (New Haven: Durrie and Peck, 1832), pp. 336-337, 49]

“All the miseries and evils which men suffer from vice, crime, ambition, injustice, oppression, slavery and war, proceed from their despising or neglecting the precepts contained in the Bible.” [Noah Webster. History. p. 339]

“The Bible was America’s basic textbook
in all fields.” [Noah Webster. Our Christian Heritage p.5]

“Education is useless without the Bible” [Noah Webster. Our Christian Heritage p.5 ]

George Washington:

Farewell Address: The name of American, which belongs to you, in your national capacity, must always exalt the just pride of Patriotism, more than any appellation derived from local discriminations. With slight shades of difference, you have the same religion" ...and later: "...reason and experience both forbid us to expect, that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle..."


“ It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and Bible.”

“What students would learn in American schools above all is the religion of Jesus Christ.” [speech to the Delaware Indian Chiefs May 12, 1779]

"To the distinguished character of patriot, it should be our highest glory to add the more distinguished character of Christian" [May 2, 1778, at Valley Forge]

During his inauguration, Washington took the oath as prescribed by the Constitution but added several religious components to that official ceremony. Before taking his oath of office, he summoned a Bible on which to take the oath, added the words “So help me God!” to the end of the oath, then leaned over and kissed the Bible.

Nelly Custis-Lewis (Washington’s adopted daughter):
Is it necessary that any one should [ask], “Did General Washington avow himself to be a believer in Christianity?" As well may we question his patriotism, his heroic devotion to his country. His mottos were, "Deeds, not Words"; and, "For God and my Country."

“ O Most Glorious God, in Jesus Christ, my merciful and loving Father; I acknowledge and confess my guilt in the weak and imperfect performance of the duties of this day. I have called on Thee for pardon and forgiveness of my sins, but so coldly and carelessly that my prayers are become my sin, and they stand in need of pardon.”
“ I have sinned against heaven and before Thee in thought, word, and deed. I have contemned Thy majesty and holy laws. I have likewise sinned by omitting what I ought to have done and committing what I ought not. I have rebelled against the light, despising Thy mercies and judgment, and broken my vows and promise. I have neglected the better things. My iniquities are multiplied and my sins are very great. I confess them, O Lord, with shame and sorrow, detestation and loathing and desire to be vile in my own eyes as I have rendered myself vile in Thine. I humbly beseech Thee to be merciful to me in the free pardon of my sins for the sake of Thy dear Son and only Savior Jesus Christ who came to call not the righteous, but sinners to repentance. Thou gavest Thy Son to die for me.”
[George Washington; from a 24 page authentic handwritten manuscript book dated April 21-23, 1752
William J. Johnson George Washington, the Christian (New York: The Abingdon Press, New York & Cincinnati, 1919), pp. 24-35.]
Now, don't just skip these. I figured most don't follow links (especially on a subject they disagree with), so I embedded a bunch of the quotes. At least read a good number of them. Now I know it is popular to claim otherwise. But from these founders' own mouths, they claim great devotion to Jesus Christ, the Savior of mankind. Furthermore, many of these quotes claim that Christianity was the guiding principles that helped develop the ideas that put this country together. Yes, older philosophers contributed. But from the mouths of those who did it, you hear that it would not have been possible without guidance from God. And not A god, but The GOD of Israel.

Why do the documents you read then seem so unoffensive to your bitter ears? Well, I figure that these men knew such a great country guided in it's formation by God would one day attract people the world over and would become very diverse. These men were also (mostly) members of one of (if not the) oldest organization in the world. Masonry is designed so that any man can join from any walk of life and any belief system and no one need agree on any one religion. It was designed to allow all who wished into the brotherhood. Maybe they thought the same would be best for this nations founding documents? I don't know, just a thought. But then again, maybe they weren't smart enough to have that much foresight... right? (...Or spiritual enough to be so guided by He whom they themselves profess to believe in and whose constant help they said would be necessary to keep this Republic afloat.)
[quote name='JolietJake']You inspired it, but it wasn't just about you. It's a general statement i've heard a lot of people make. Granted yours seems almost as corny.[/QUOTE]
If you're so smart, help the world come up with a good way to let others know that they see everybody as equals. You may not be able to do that, but my CHRISTIAN PRINCIPLES help me truly feel that way. (Sorry, I had to do it.)
[quote name='The Crotch']Hell, many religious leaders of the day derided the constitution (Constitution?) as being atheistic.

EDIT: Not trying to start a bullshit quote war here or anything, just saying.[/QUOTE]

As I said, my understanding is the founders did that on purpose, so as not to offend anyone and to welcome all to this great country.

And about your James Madison quote, please see the Madison quotes I provided. On the surface they seem contradictory, no? Or you could look at the intent and context of such quotes and they do make sense together. The quote you shared didn't say that strong religious values couldn't keep a government strong and in favor of the people. It only said that to date, such has not been able to be accomplished. The quotes in my cut 'n' paste, on the other hand, specifically say that this nation will not be able to endure in the manner they intended it to if the people abandon the tenets that are found within Christianity, that somehow the previously undoable needs to be done.

I know you are just going to come back with, but they are Deists! Really! Sure, whatever. But they believe in Christ and said such believes motivated what they did.


I'm really not good at staying out of a thread when I say I'm done... :(



EDIT:
Crotch, I didn't include all of those quotes to counter you. Really. I started this post after SNS made his, then I had to leave for a while before I finished. I wasn't trying to one up you. (Or 1 million up you either...)



EDIT2:

Don't miss the quotes and linked pages at the top of that page I linked to.
"The country's first two presidents, George Washington and John Adams,
were firm believers in the importance of religion for republican government." --official Library of Congress statement

"...both the legislators and the public considered it appropriate
for the national government to promote a nondenominational, nonpolemical Christianity."--official Library of Congress statement

Have you ever read a quote that seemed to show that our Founders weren't Christians?
Click here to see an example of a quote taken out of context, and a tutorial on examining these quotes!

And in the first link there is an answer to what I reasoned about and the answer is pretty much what I said, the founding fathers didn't want to offend people by suggesting any particular religion. They felt that it was the State's job to do such (if any government at all).
When the Constitution was submitted to the American public, "many pious people" complained that the document had slighted God, for it contained "no recognition of his mercies to us . . . or even of his existence." The Constitution was reticent about religion for two reasons: first, many delegates were committed federalists, who believed that the power to legislate on religion, if it existed at all, lay within the domain of the state, not the national, governments; second, the delegates believed that it would be a tactical mistake to introduce such a politically controversial issue as religion into the Constitution. The only "religious clause" in the document--the proscription of religious tests as qualifications for federal office in Article Six--was intended to defuse controversy by disarming potential critics who might claim religious discrimination in eligibility for public office.

It's not really that hard to understand these things and to not take things out of context. Honestly, I believe the majority of people who rant about anti-religion/faith and the founding principles of this country understand the truth, but they know it's so easy to lie and convince people otherwise. The reason I didn't jump right into all of this originally is because I knew it would offend some to hear the truth. But more importantly, there are some who are so entrenched in their vitriolic ideology that no amount of truth and facts will convince them to believe otherwise.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
MorPhiend, Never have I seen someone on CAG take up so much space to say so little.

But they believe in Christ and said such believes motivated what they did.

You have no idea what you are talking about.

And laws don't necessarily need secular reasoning. You need secular reasoning.

Not only do you not have any idea what you are talking about you are also insane.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wow, these posts are turning into god damn messes. Gimme a minute to try and... y'know... format things so that they don't give you eye-stigmata.
 
[quote name='Msut77']MorPhiend, Never have I seen someone on CAG take up so much space to say so little.



You have no idea what you are talking about.



Not only do you not have any idea what you are talking about you are also insane.[/QUOTE]

You have no capacity for reason. I thought that was established a while back when you kept repeating the same thing that no one could understand and thought the rest of the world was cuckoo and you were normal.

Did you bother reading any of the quotes from the founders who spoke of Christ, talked of Christ and said the nation depended on such beliefs? No, I didn't think so. Like I said, blind morons like yourself aren't looking for truth. You just want to believe what you want to believe.

And you took what I said out of context. If challenged in court, a law will likely need to be explained secularly. When passing a law, such does not need to happen. A majority of the people only needs to agree (whether voters or congress).
[quote name='The Crotch']y'know... format things so that they don't give you eye-stigmata.[/QUOTE]Yeah. Sorry. I've already used up too much time trying to reply to crazy people like Msut...


This seems to be getting off topic, but I just want to remind everyone that it was mentioned something to the effect that Palin shouldn't be allowed to govern because she is religious and that affects her decisions. My post was to illustrate that the founders were religious and that affected their decisions in establishing this country...
 
MorPhiend,

I respect you for even trying to have this discussion with such a rabid anti-religious crowd. So for that, kudos to you.

But you need to know that there are a few posters (I won't name names, as you can spot them yourself) that almost never have anything to add to a conversation other than personal attacks, juvenile belittling comments, and Jr. High level smack talk. They can't discuss. They can't argue. They can't be reasoned with. They are only here to get their frustrations out from all the times Dad touched them, or something. Their only goal on CAG is to antagonize.

You'd do well to use the ignore button more often, as many of us have. Save a lot of time.
 
[quote name='MorPhiend']Did you bother reading any of the quotes from the founders who spoke of Christ, talked of Christ and said the nation depended on such beliefs?.[/QUOTE]

What seems to escape you is that is people, people today or from the past can talk about Jesus and his teachings completely apart from his supposed divinity.

Atheists (and Deists and Buddhists etc.) can be pretty big fans of Jesus without worshiping him or believing all the nonsense.

You have shown yourself not only to be a loon but all in all a bad person.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']MorPhiend,

I respect you for even trying to have this discussion with such a rabid anti-religious crowd. So for that, kudos to you.

But you need to know that there are a few posters (I won't name names, as you can spot them yourself) that almost never have anything to add to a conversation other than personal attacks, juvenile belittling comments, and Jr. High level smack talk. They can't discuss. They can't argue. They can't be reasoned with. They are only here to get their frustrations out from all the times Dad touched them, or something. Their only goal on CAG is to antagonize.

You'd do well to use the ignore button more often, as many of us have. Save a lot of time.[/QUOTE]Thanks. I gotta share what I believe in. I spent too many years being part of the "silent majority". But you are probably right. I need to use the ignore feature. I don't even know if anyone is on there. There might be one person from about a year ago...

But I just need to say one more thing...
[quote name='Msut77']What seems to escape you is that is people, people today or from the past can talk about Jesus and his teachings completely apart from his supposed divinity.

Atheists (and Deists and Buddhists etc.) can be pretty big fans of Jesus without worshiping him or believing all the nonsense.

You have shown yourself not only to be a loon but all in all a bad person.[/QUOTE]Again, you have proven yourself beyond reason and beyond even the ability to read. I have a whole list of statements straight from the founders where they didn't just say that Jesus is a cool dude and he taught people the golden rule. They explicitly stated that God does interfere in the lives of man, that the Lord did build up this nation and that this nation will fall except he continues to sustain it and guide it upon paths of righteousness. They say that again and again. It sounds to me like they believed more than in Jesus being a neat-o guy.

Please read something for once.

EDIT:
I'll make it easy for you. Here's one:
On July 12, 1804 at his death, Hamilton said, “I have a tender reliance on the mercy of the Almighty, through the merits of the Lord Jesus Christ. I am a sinner. I look to Him for mercy; pray for me.”

Yup, Hamilton thought Jesus was a cool dude too...
 
Yech. Longest post I've done in a long time. Not that I wrote all that much - it just takes a lot of time to arrange this shit.

[quote name='MorPhiend']How lame are you? I never said Christianity is the root of our founding documents. I said those who founded this country had faith in a creator.[/quote]Saying it was merely "faith in a creator" then mocking the idea that the founding fathers were deists a few paragraphs later is bad form, man.[quote name='MorPhiend']
And laws don't necessarily need secular reasoning. You need secular reasoning. Like you said, the majority of America is Christian. So, the majority of America is willing to accept laws based upon Christian ideals. They don't need additonal reasoning when they already agree. And the majority of Muslims and Jews are willing to accept those same things simply because the "Big 3" have much more in common than they have different from one another. Now, the Supreme Court, in reviewing a law, needs more than a, "well it sounds like a good law." But the voters and elected officials can pass any law they damn well please because the majority of Americans (especially any one smaller community) really feel the same way about most things.[/quote]First, minor quibble: Judaism is part of the Big 3? I know we tend to have an Abrahamic-centric view here, but... Judaism? I think I know a few hundred million Hindus who would like to talk to you.

More importantly, you seem to have a bizarre love of the tyranny of the majority. Vox populi, vox dei? I don't think so. To go back to Madison (fuck): [quote name='You fucking know who, dammit.']Complaints are everywhere heard from our most considerate and virtuous citizens, equally the friends of public and private faith, and of public and personal liberty, that our governments are too unstable, that the public good is disregarded in the conflicts of rival parties, and that measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority.[/quote]

...

High-school English teachers weep. I could have cut out half of that sentence at least and lost nothing. Motherfucker loved his commas.

[quote name='MorPhiend'] But in the end, the founding documents do talk about faith in a Creator. That is all I ever claimed. And I did so because I do worry about offending the gentle effeminate...[/quote]Also, "east-coast", "ivy-league", "liberal", and "elitist". Just, you know, throwing the rest of the synonyms out there.
[quote name='MorPhiend']... opinions such as yours that get trodden under foot so easily. So, if you want to play your little game, I can throw quotes at you too...

Blah!

Now, don't just skip these. I figured most don't follow links (especially on a subject they disagree with), so I embedded a bunch of the quotes. At least read a good number of them. [/quote]I didn't need to read them. What I did was this: I hit Ctrl+F, and pasted "the whole future of American civilization, not upon the" into the search, then hit enter. And I found Madison quote that... doesn't appear in any known writings of his. It was created, if memory serves, by a conservative writer in the 90s who later admitted that it was fake. I did the same with " to rightly govern the world without God" and hit a fake Washington quote. Now, some of those are real, I don't doubt you there, but I ain't your editor here, man.

A bit more browsing of the quotes without factcheck mode on showed a lot of "Yeah, Jesus was pretty alright" quotes rather than "Look guys, don't take this 'seperation of church and state' thing too far". Not all, to be sure, but I read, like, every 8th quote or some shit. I don't really wanna touch those anymore than I did.

[quote name='MorPhiend'] Now I know it is popular to claim otherwise. But from these founders' own mouths, they claim great devotion to Jesus Christ, the Savior of mankind. Furthermore, many of these quotes claim that Christianity was the guiding principles that helped develop the ideas that put this country together. Yes, older philosophers contributed. But from the mouths of those who did it, you hear that it would not have been possible without guidance from God. And not A god, but The GOD of Israel.[/quote]Woah, I thought you were just saying that "those who founded this country had faith in a creator." Now, the two aren't mutually exclusive positions, but you seem to be trying damn hard to make them so.

[quote name='MorPhiend']Masonry is designed so that any man can join from any walk of life and any belief system and no one need agree on any one religion. As I said, my understanding is the founders did that on purpose, so as not to offend anyone and to welcome all to this great country.[/quote]"Man" being the keyword in your first sentence there. They accounted for Buddhists, dammit, but not for women (jury's still out on female Buddhists)!

[quote name='MorPhiend']And about your James Madison quote, please see the Madison quotes I provided. On the surface they seem contradictory, no? Or you could look at the intent and context of such quotes and they do make sense together. The quote you shared didn't say that strong religious values couldn't keep a government strong and in favor of the people. It only said that to date, such has not been able to be accomplished. The quotes in my cut 'n' paste, on the other hand, specifically say that this nation will not be able to endure in the manner they intended it to if the people abandon the tenets that are found within Christianity, that somehow the previously undoable needs to be done.[/quote]Sounds like the oft-quoted (and probably wrong; I've never actually looked it up) definition of insanity to me. Either way, it doesn't inspire confidence, but given the veracity of the two quotes I checked out, I'm not terribly worried.

[quote name='MorPhiend']I know you are just going to come back with, but they are Deists! Really! Sure, whatever. But they believe in Christ and said such believes motivated what they did.[/quote]Yeah! What kind of pussy-ass would say something like, oh, they just "believed in a creator". Downright effeminate, man.

[quote name='MorPhiend']EDIT:
Crotch, I didn't include all of those quotes to counter you. Really. I started this post after SNS made his, then I had to leave for a while before I finished. I wasn't trying to one up you. (Or 1 million up you either...)[/quote]The only real losers here are the people who actually read all those fucking things.


Now lets see if this shit is readable.

EDIT: Fun fact - just as I finished this post, Jello Biafra yelled out "God told me to skin you alive!" Good timing, Mr. Biafra!
 
[quote name='MorPhiend']Again, you have proven yourself beyond reason and beyond even the ability to read. [/QUOTE]

For there to be an again there would have had to have been a first time.

I have a whole list of cherry-picked statements straight from some random liars website

I noticed it, read it and found myself not terribly impressed by it.

You and your disgusting brethren completely ignore pretty much every historical document and the Founding Fathers roots in the enlightenment etc. for the most part the ones that were religious were not dogmatic or fundamentalists which is how you are portraying them. Do you honestly think the Founding Fathers were witch burning dolts? Perhaps you should try to answer before trying to play the quote game and failing again?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='The Crotch']Yech. Longest post I've done in a long time. Not that I wrote all that much - it just takes a lot of time to arrange this shit.[/QUOTE]Tell me about it.

[quote name='The Crotch']Saying it was merely "faith in a creator" then mocking the idea that the founding fathers were deists a few paragraphs later is bad form, man.First, minor quibble: Judaism is part of the Big 3? I know we tend to have an Abrahamic-centric view here, but... Judaism? I think I know a few hundred million Hindus who would like to talk to you.[/QUOTE]Firstly, I guess you missed the part where I explained my original wording was selected as to not start this whole discussion about Christianity in the first place. I'm not trying to "have it both ways". I was selecting my argument for my audience. I knew no matter what evidence I brought in, this audience will not accept Christian principles as being something the founders believed in. I mean, lets go back in time and tell the Roman Empire that the Earth revolves around the sun. You gotta pick your battles, man. I'm not talking out of both sides of my mouth and I already explained that. It is apparent that you want to be irrational instead of seek truth.

And yeah that is a minor quibble. Irrelevant even. How many hundred million Hindus do you know who live in the United States? Yeah. They really apply to our discussion of the Constitution and other founding documents. Really, man. What are you in second grade? You know exactly what I was talking about and you want to get offended.

[quote name='The Crotch']Also, "east-coast", "ivy-league", "liberal", and "elitist". Just, you know, throwing the rest of the synonyms out there.[/QUOTE] I thought you might enjoy that.
[quote name='The Crotch']I didn't need to read them. What I did was this: I hit Ctrl+F, and pasted "the whole future of American civilization, not upon the" into the search, then hit enter. And I found Madison quote that... doesn't appear in any known writings of his. It was created, if memory serves, by a conservative writer in the 90s who later admitted that it was fake. I did the same with " to rightly govern the world without God" and hit a fake Washington quote. Now, some of those are real, I don't doubt you there, but I ain't your editor here, man.[/QUOTE]And if you read my post, you would know that I did a cut 'n' paste job because I said I did. This has already consumed enough hours of my life. I'm sure some of those sources aren't the most accurate. But a lot are. And you missed the quotes from the official LOC statements. Again, why only flamr the few things that you thkn you can spin your direction, why not grant facts as well? Oh that's right. Because it will hurt your ideological crusade.

[quote name='The Crotch']A bit more browsing of the quotes without factcheck mode on showed a lot of "Yeah, Jesus was pretty alright" quotes rather than "Look guys, don't take this 'seperation of church and state' thing too far". Not all, to be sure, but I read, like, every 8th quote or some shit. I don't really wanna touch those anymore than I did.[/QUOTE]Well, that's your choice to ignore evidence.

[quote name='The Crotch']Woah, I thought you were just saying that "those who founded this country had faith in a creator." Now, the two aren't mutually exclusive positions, but you seem to be trying damn hard to make them so.[/QUOTE]Again, different audiences get different messages. I didn't want to get in it with trolls, so I customized my message accordingly. The trolls came out anyway because their radar was set to overly-sensitive and the twisted what I said, so I have went about correcting the nuttiness. As I feared, it does no good.

[quote name='The Crotch']"Man" being the keyword in your first sentence there. They accounted for Buddhists, dammit, but not for women (jury's still out on female Buddhists)![/QUOTE]Yeah, but you have to realize that the order came down from a patriarchal society (specifically an imitation of the Holy Priesthood, but lets not go down that road. It's neither here nor there...).

[quote name='The Crotch']Sounds like the oft-quoted (and probably wrong; I've never actually looked it up) definition of insanity to me. Either way, it doesn't inspire confidence, but given the veracity of the two quotes I checked out, I'm not terribly worried.[/QUOTE]Okay. No one had ever attained the time that Usain Bolt did a few weeks ago. If he had been yearning for such a time beforehand, is that also the definition of crazy? Just because a Republic has never endured in the past (with or without religious roots) does not mean it cannot. That was his argument. And that is not crazy.

[quote name='The Crotch']Yeah! What kind of pussy-ass would say something like, oh, they just "believed in a creator". Downright effeminate, man.[/QUOTE]I never said that believing in deism was wrong. I said that the evidence is that the majority of these men were professed Christians.

[quote name='The Crotch']The only real losers here are the people who actually read all those fucking things.[/QUOTE]:(
I've only read through a lot of them. But I was planning on reading them all eventually. As I said before (at least twice now), I cut and pasted after I scanned through them. I didn't have eons to sort them out. They were just a nice example of what's available.


I don't understand why people continue taking comments from me or the founders out of context. I also don't see why people need to use so much vulgarity.
 
Religion just bores the hell out of me.

There is but one true god, the Flying Spaghetti Head Monster.

Jesus may have died for your sins, but FSHM died for your dinner.
 
[quote name='MorPhiend']I think McCain is generally a good guy too. I think he is a hero and I think he has picked a heroic woman as his running mate.[/QUOTE]

Morphiend, while I appreciate your response and the fact that you do a good job at disagreeing with me without spiking my easily-set ire, you owe me an apology.

I choked on my dinner when I read that sentence.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']Ramen is the poor people's version of the FSM.

Poor people heaven is just like rich people's purgatory.[/QUOTE]

As a Pastafarian I believe the Stripper Factories and Beer Volcanoes are open to all.
 
[quote name='MorPhiend']But I haven't heard about her taking some of the money in the end. Is that fact? I'd like to see more about that.[/QUOTE]

Now, I know "Reuters" is a member of the liberal elite, and not the balanced-and-accurate Ann Coulter, whose vitriol you're clearly a fan of (and why not mine!?!? ;)), but if you can hold your nose for a minute and open your eyes, you may learn something:

http://www.reuters.com/article/vcCandidateFeed7/idUSN3125537020080901

This article features such hit numbers as:

"When she was running for governor in 2006, Palin said she was insulted by the term "bridge to nowhere," according to Ketchikan Mayor Bob Weinstein, a Democrat, and Mike Elerding, a Republican who was Palin's campaign coordinator in the southeast Alaska city."

And don't forget the soothing sounds of this classic:

"National fury over the bridge caused Congress to remove the earmark designation, but Alaska was still granted an equivalent amount of transportation money to be used at its own discretion."

But wait! There's more!

"Last year, Palin announced she was stopping state work on the controversial project, earning her admirers from earmark critics and budget hawks from around the nation. The move also thrust her into the spotlight as a reform-minded newcomer.

The state, however, never gave back any of the money that was originally earmarked for the Gravina Island bridge, said Weinstein and Elerding.

In fact, the Palin administration has spent "tens of millions of dollars" in federal funds to start building a road on Gravina Island that is supposed to link up to the yet-to-be-built bridge, Weinstein said.

"She said 'thanks but no thanks,' but they kept the money," said Elerding about her applause line."

If you act now, you'll even get her covering the greats!

"Palin's spokeswoman in Alaska was not immediately available to comment."

Hurry! Supplies are limited!
 
[quote name='MorPhiend']
Firstly, I guess you missed the part where I explained my original wording was selected as to not start this whole discussion about Christianity in the first place. I'm not trying to "have it both ways". I was selecting my argument for my audience.[/quote]I'm not exactly sure what you were trying to accomplish. Epic fail with regards to not starting this argument, and since you obviously go beyond "they had faith in a creator", I'm not sure just what argument you were trying to put forward. Were you trying to water-down your own beliefs for others, there?

...

I said "epic fail" already, didn't I?

[quote name='MorPhiend']And yeah that is a minor quibble. Irrelevant even. How many hundred million Hindus do you know who live in the United States? Yeah. They really apply to our discussion of the Constitution and other founding documents. Really, man. What are you in second grade? You know exactly what I was talking about and you want to get offended.[/quote]First, you're being pissy touchy for no reason here. I'm not your fucking enemy here. And as it turns out, the CIA thinks we're both idiots. While Judaism is indeed one of the "big three" in the US (assuming you don't count non-religious/unaffiliated), Islam is not. It is smaller than both Mormonism (which you might want to stick in with the rest of the giant Christian Katamari Damacy) and Buddhism. Anyone have a "the more you know" graphic?

[quote name='MorPhiend'] I thought you might enjoy that.[/quote]That's stretching it. Like god damn Armstrong.

[quote name='MorPhiend'] And if you read my post, you would know that I did a cut 'n' paste job because I said I did. This has already consumed enough hours of my life. I'm sure some of those sources aren't the most accurate. But a lot are. And you missed the quotes from the official LOC statements. Again, why only flamr the few things that you thkn you can spin your direction, why not grant facts as well? Oh that's right. Because it will hurt your ideological crusade.[/quote]I don't clean up other people's bullshit. If I post a quote that is wrong, I will admit that I didn't check things properly and move on. You admit that you didn't do your work and... still insisted that the quotes were awesome. If they're that fantastic, maybe I'll give 'em a combing (Comb-over? Eww...) after supper.

[quote name='MorPhiend']Okay. No one had ever attained the time that Usain Bolt did a few weeks ago. If he had been yearning for such a time beforehand, is that also the definition of crazy? Just because a Republic has never endured in the past (with or without religious roots) does not mean it cannot. That was his argument. And that is not crazy.[/quote]Actually, I think a lot of that was the argument of 20th-century author David Barton. Yeah, I finally Googled the name.

[quote name='MorPhiend'] I never said that believing in deism was wrong. I said that the evidence is that the majority of these men were professed Christians.[/quote]Not what I was getting at. I was commenting that it appears as though you attempted to water down your beliefs in your initial posts. Not trying to attract us crazies and all that noise. You can say that that was something else entirely, but about all it appears from this side of things is pointless.

[quote name='MorPhiend']I've only read through a lot of them. But I was planning on reading them all eventually. As I said before (at least twice now), I cut and pasted after I scanned through them. I didn't have eons to sort them out. They were just a nice example of what's available.[/quote]As it turned out, they weren't that great of examples. You could have taken, like... 3 of them, pumped them into Google, and then posted them on here once you've checked them out. It would have made your point about a billion times better.

[quote name='MorPhiend'] I don't understand why people continue taking comments from me or the founders out of context.[/quote]I think your website is the guiltiest of anyone here.

[quote name='MorPhiend']I also don't see why people need to use so much vulgarity.[/quote]fuck piss shit whore goddamn sonofabitch twat.

Myself, I don't see why I use so many commas. Doesn't it get irritating?
 
Most frightening thing I've seen in years (no joke, no hyperbole, seriously, this scares the hell out of me):

080908DailyUpdateGraph1_n4b7v2.gif
 
The popular vote is pretty close, but Obama has a good handle on 280+ electoral votes.

That said, if the public votes for a Republican after the past eight years, I'm not moving to Canada, but I will just give up on politics on the whole. You can only try to lecture on Emile Durkheim to kindergartners for so long before it occurs to you that you should pack your things and go home - they're fucking kindergartners, dude.
 
[quote name='The Crotch']Damn, I was counting on tagging out with you. Hrmph. Get TRQ, wouldja?[/quote]

Well I'm not going to argue with the dude, but suffice it to say that arguing that people like Jefferson, Franklin, Madison, etc. were Bible-believing Christians is absurd. To say that they based their decisions on "Christian values" depends on what values you're talking about and how Christian they really are.

And to Koggit - scary, but it was pretty obvious that he'd get his convention bump. Hopefully it doesn't last too long.
 
Honest to god, I expected the announcement of Palin and her acceptance speech to hurt McCain. I'm fully aware of convention bumps, but I didn't think Americans were dumb enough to buy into Palin. I thought the McCain campaign had made a fatal error.

The current Gallup is terrifying.
 
[quote name='Koggit']Honest to god, I expected the announcement of Palin and her acceptance speech to hurt McCain. I'm fully aware of convention bumps, but I didn't think Americans were dumb enough to buy into Palin. I thought the McCain campaign had made a fatal error.

The current Gallup is terrifying.[/quote]

Never underestimate Americans!
 
[quote name='mykevermin']The popular vote is pretty close, but Obama has a good handle on 280+ electoral votes.

That said, if the public votes for a Republican after the past eight years, I'm not moving to Canada, but I will just give up on politics on the whole. You can only try to lecture on Emile Durkheim to kindergartners for so long before it occurs to you that you should pack your things and go home - they're fucking kindergartners, dude.[/QUOTE]

Canada is too close and would probably be sucked down with us, Sweden for me.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Morphiend, while I appreciate your response and the fact that you do a good job at disagreeing with me without spiking my easily-set ire, you owe me an apology.

I choked on my dinner when I read that sentence.[/QUOTE]Well, while I do believe she is, I must indeed apologize for springing it on you so unexpectedly. The last think I want is for you to die. You are much too interesting (and entertaining) of a conversationist to go in such a manner.
[quote name='mykevermin']Now, I know "Reuters" is a member of the liberal elite, and not the balanced-and-accurate Ann Coulter, whose vitriol you're clearly a fan of (and why not mine!?!? ;)), but if you can hold your nose for a minute and open your eyes, you may learn something:

http://www.reuters.com/article/vcCandidateFeed7/idUSN3125537020080901

This article features such hit numbers as:

"When she was running for governor in 2006, Palin said she was insulted by the term "bridge to nowhere," according to Ketchikan Mayor Bob Weinstein, a Democrat, and Mike Elerding, a Republican who was Palin's campaign coordinator in the southeast Alaska city."

And don't forget the soothing sounds of this classic:

"National fury over the bridge caused Congress to remove the earmark designation, but Alaska was still granted an equivalent amount of transportation money to be used at its own discretion."

But wait! There's more!

"Last year, Palin announced she was stopping state work on the controversial project, earning her admirers from earmark critics and budget hawks from around the nation. The move also thrust her into the spotlight as a reform-minded newcomer.

The state, however, never gave back any of the money that was originally earmarked for the Gravina Island bridge, said Weinstein and Elerding.

In fact, the Palin administration has spent "tens of millions of dollars" in federal funds to start building a road on Gravina Island that is supposed to link up to the yet-to-be-built bridge, Weinstein said.

"She said 'thanks but no thanks,' but they kept the money," said Elerding about her applause line."

If you act now, you'll even get her covering the greats!

"Palin's spokeswoman in Alaska was not immediately available to comment."

Hurry! Supplies are limited![/QUOTE]I do like Ann, but I hope I didn't call her balanced. While she is probably more hateful than I would like to admit, I do like the ironic truths to be found within her commentary. That being said, though I do believe in the liberal elite theory (that the liberal elite exists), I also do listen to what they have to say. There is truth to be found in most places. I do read/watch all sorts of sources. I enjoy NPR almost as much as a healthy dose of Rush.

That article does disturb me. I wonder what their response to the allegations will be. I guess it will be hard to cover up keeping the money if they did keep it. Thanks for pointing it out to me. That will definitely be a concern going forward.
[quote name='The Crotch']I'm not exactly sure what you were trying to accomplish. Epic fail with regards to not starting this argument, and since you obviously go beyond "they had faith in a creator", I'm not sure just what argument you were trying to put forward. Were you trying to water-down your own beliefs for others, there?

...

Not what I was getting at. I was commenting that it appears as though you attempted to water down your beliefs in your initial posts. Not trying to attract us crazies and all that noise. You can say that that was something else entirely, but about all it appears from this side of things is pointless.[/QUOTE]You obviously don't know a thing about proper argument, do you? You don't argue something with someone who you know isn't going to agree in the slightest. You might as well argue against a brick wall. You tailor your comments to the audience and try to find broader common ground. It wasn't until someone took what I said to mean exactly what I intended to avoid (and I think they did it on purpose) that I tried to clarify their misconceptions with what I believe to be the full truth about our nation's past. It's not lying, it's not misleading. It is a normal part of debate called rhetoric. You use words to build common ground as you can and you go from there. Learn about it and you will go far in life, or at least farther than you will otherwise.

[quote name='The Crotch']fuck piss shit whore goddamn sonofabitch twat.[/QUOTE]

And this displays exactly how much people should listen to your opinions. How do you expect to get anywhere with a person if you not only refuse to respect them, but you choose to disrespect them in such a vile and purposeful manner. That's another thing you should learn to get past so you can have a more successful life.

[quote name='mykevermin']The popular vote is pretty close, but Obama has a good handle on 280+ electoral votes.

That said, if the public votes for a Republican after the past eight years, I'm not moving to Canada, but I will just give up on politics on the whole. You can only try to lecture on Emile Durkheim to kindergartners for so long before it occurs to you that you should pack your things and go home - they're fucking kindergartners, dude.[/QUOTE]To be sure. The popular vote is looking close right now, but it is all really going to depend on those swing states. Russert said Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico and Montana, no? But there are more that are looking to play into it recently as well (Virginia and is it Minnesota? among a few others). The electoral votes might swing opposite of the popular vote again indeed. The numbers can be manipulated to look scary for either party right now, regardless of the popular vote opinion polls.

And it seems that almost every post of yours has me googling either a definition or a person. Why must you make the rest of us look so uninformed?
 
And this displays exactly how much people should listen to your opinions. How do you expect to get anywhere with a person if you not only refuse to respect them, but you choose to disrespect them in such a vile and purposeful manner. That's another thing you should learn to get past so you can have a more successful life.

Says the avowed Ann Coulter fan.
 
Sorry for bringing this back up, but I still want to touch on a few points.

[quote name='MorPhiend']How lame are you? I never said Christianity is the root of our founding documents.[/QUOTE]

You said this country was founded on faith. Not that it was founded by people of faith. An important distinction. My assumption was that you were trying to claim that America was a Christian nation. I was wrong.

[quote name='MorPhiend']But from these founders' own mouths, they claim great devotion to Jesus Christ, the Savior of mankind. Furthermore, many of these quotes claim that Christianity was the guiding principles that helped develop the ideas that put this country together.[/QUOTE]

The quotes you pulled showed nothing more than people of faith. I don't have a problem with that, even though you seem to think that I do. What I don't follow is how this has any relevance to the founding documents or laws of the country. When it comes down to it the founding documents barely even mention the creator. I don't see how that amounts to a "country founded on faith."

Furthermore, many of those quotes are fabricated:

[quote name='MorPhiend']“It cannot be emphasized too clearly and too often that this nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religion, but on the gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason, peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here.” [May 1765 Speech to the House of Burgesses]

“ It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and Bible.”

“We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We’ve staked the future of all our political institutions upon our capacity…to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God.” [1778 to the General Assembly of the State of Virginia]
[/QUOTE]

All fakes. See here:
http://www.michiganatheists.org/quotes2.html

[quote name='MorPhiend']And laws don't necessarily need secular reasoning. You need secular reasoning. Like you said, the majority of America is Christian. So, the majority of America is willing to accept laws based upon Christian ideals. They don't need additonal reasoning when they already agree.[/QUOTE]

This is where I'm completely lost in your reasoning. What you suggest is pretty much unconstitutional. Elevating religious ideas into law when there is no secular reason amounts to religious endorsement.
 
^^Religious endorsement is a lot of what Palin is about (creationism taught in school, abstinence only sex ed., outlaw gay marriage) There's no reasoning behind these laws/ideas aside from religious beliefs and it is absolutely unconstitutional. But it's what some people, like Palin, want.

edit: Just take a look at the pledge
[FONT=arial,helvetica]Between 1924 and 1954, the Pledge of Allegiance was worded:[/FONT]
[FONT=arial,helvetica]"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands; one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." [/FONT]
[FONT=arial,helvetica]In 1954, during the McCarthy era and communism scare, Congress passed a bill, which was signed into law, to add the words "under God." The current Pledge reads:[/FONT]
[FONT=arial,helvetica]"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands; one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." [/FONT]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I hate Palin and think any American who supports her as VP is an absolute imbecile, but I'm sick of people saying she wants creationism taught in schools. That's not true. She simply doesn't want creationism barred from schools, which is a very rational stance -- perhaps her only rational stance.
 
[quote name='Koggit']I hate Palin and think any American who supports her as VP is an absolute imbecile, but I'm sick of people saying she wants creationism taught in schools. That's not true. She simply doesn't want creationism barred from schools, which is a very rational stance -- perhaps her only rational stance.[/QUOTE]

How come you think its a rational stance? I could see maybe if you think just because nothing should be barred from schools per say....but outside that the idea of creationism getting anywhere near a public school is a joke. Creationism has no leg to stand on, its nothing but a belief system with no rational facts backing it. School is a place for facts....
 
[quote name='MSI Magus']How come you think its a rational stance? I could see maybe if you think just because nothing should be barred from schools per say....but outside that the idea of creationism getting anywhere near a public school is a joke. Creationism has no leg to stand on, its nothing but a belief system with no rational facts backing it. School is a place for facts....[/QUOTE]

Well, maybe if you debated it in a philosophy class (in college) or a seminar on "why people believe weird things" (again, college), it would be ok.

But, I agree with you that the subject has no place in, for example, a science class. It has no scientific grounding at all.
 
[quote name='The Crotch']Eh. Maybe as part of a "this does not qualify as science and here's why" series?[/QUOTE]

Throw in a vigorous discussion of bigfoot sightings, UFOs, and 9-11 conspiracy theories, and you have yourself a 4 credit class.
 
[quote name='sgs89']Throw in a vigorous discussion of bigfoot sightings, UFOs, and 9-11 conspiracy theories, and you have yourself a 4 credit class.[/QUOTE]

Sounds like my undergrad logic instructor.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Sounds like my undergrad logic instructor.[/QUOTE]

You had a logic instructor who used UFOs/Bigfoot/crackpot conspiracy theories to teach logic?
 
[quote name='mykevermin']UFOs and the existence of God, yes.

Dropped the class, kept the text, enjoyed life.[/QUOTE]

I miss our robust SCOTUS/Con Law discussions from 2005.

Those were the days...
 
[quote name='sgs89']Well, maybe if you debated it in a philosophy class (in college) or a seminar on "why people believe weird things" (again, college), it would be ok.

But, I agree with you that the subject has no place in, for example, a science class. It has no scientific grounding at all.[/QUOTE]

I went to school for 2 years as a philosphy major before I changed to political science. In a high school debate in philosphy yes it could be brought up....outside that no i dont think so. But hey you said you agreed so ya heh.

Edit -Logic sucks. My god that was the hardest and most annoying class I ever took. It was like taking math and mixing it with verbal riddles.
 
[quote name='MSI Magus']I went to school for 2 years as a philosphy major before I changed to political science. In a high school debate in philosphy yes it could be brought up....outside that no i dont think so. But hey you said you agreed so ya heh.

Edit -Logic sucks. My god that was the hardest and most annoying class I ever took. It was like taking math and mixing it with verbal riddles.[/QUOTE]

Since you were a poli sci major, did you end up going to law school?

If so, you would have taken the LSAT, which has a major logic section in it. If you took the exam, what was your take on the "logic of the LSAT"?
 
[quote name='Koggit']I hate Palin and think any American who supports her as VP is an absolute imbecile, but I'm sick of people saying she wants creationism taught in schools. That's not true. She simply doesn't want creationism barred from schools, which is a very rational stance -- perhaps her only rational stance.[/quote]

Saying she doesn't want creationism barred is just a roundabout way of saying she would like it to be/thinks it should be taught. That's politics.
And, like MSI Magnus said, it should be kept far far away from schools (at least public.) There are parents, like me, who work hard not to let their kids heads get filled up with religion.
 
[quote name='sgs89']I miss our robust SCOTUS/Con Law discussions from 2005.

Those were the days...[/QUOTE]

Don't think I've forgotten.

Ha.
 
[quote name='MSI Magus']How come you think its a rational stance? I could see maybe if you think just because nothing should be barred from schools per say....but outside that the idea of creationism getting anywhere near a public school is a joke. Creationism has no leg to stand on, its nothing but a belief system with no rational facts backing it. School is a place for facts....[/QUOTE]

If we only want facts taught in school then several theoretical's should be omitted - such as the big bang theory, man made climate change theory, string theory, quantum theory, etc.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']If we only want facts taught in school then several things should be omitted such as the big bang theory, man made climate change, and many others.[/QUOTE]

Do you really mean to suggest that the Big Bang Theory has as little scientific validity as creationism? Really?
 
[quote name='sgs89']Do you really mean to suggest that the Big Bang Theory has as little scientific validity as creationism? Really?[/QUOTE]

No, but it's not fact, and he said we should only teach facts.

Imo, there is as much "evidence" for intelligent design as their is for big bang theory. Not creationism, intelligent design.
 
bread's done
Back
Top